[TowerTalk] 12-14-2008 update on Palmdale ham radio ban

[Kelly Johnson]

It's just not that simple.  PRB-1 was written in a way that leaves
lots of things to interpretation.  The root of the problem is the term
"reasonable".  "Reasonable" is not an absolute term.  It means
different things to different people.  Cities can do whatever they
want until hams are willing to empty their pocketbooks and hire the
lawyers necessary to fight it.  The ARRL doesn't have the money to go
fight all of these fights.  The state AG isn't going to do a darn
thing.

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 2:42 PM, Dave Tipton <dave at dmtgweb.com> wrote:
> Love it or hate it, Gray Davis signed a PRB-1 like law for California in
> 2003.
>
> The measure won approval of the California Assembly April 10 on a 67-0 vote
> and passed the state Senate June 25 on a 38-0 vote. On June 30, the
> California Assembly, on a 77-0 vote, concurred with changes in language that
> the Senate had made in the legislation.
>
> AB 1228 incorporates the language of PRB-1 into the statutes of California.
> It would require any ordinance regulating Amateur Radio antenna structures
> not to preclude but to "reasonably accommodate" Amateur Radio
> communications, to allow amateur station antenna structures "at heights and
> dimensions sufficient to accommodate Amateur Radio Service communications"
> and to constitute "the minimum practicable regulation to accomplish the
> legitimate purpose of the city or county."
>
> Seems to me, all the hams of Palmdale need to do, is call the Attorney
> General and point out that one of their cities is about to break state
> law...
>
> http://www2.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/07/15/101/
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: towertalk-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:towertalk-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2008 4:30 PM
> To: towertalk at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] 12-14-2008 update on Palmdale ham radio ban
>
> Quite aside from the wasted time, much of what he says unfortunately is
> sheer nonsense.  Commerce does not control FCC, or even have any influence
> on amateur regulation.  Palmdale needs to see a warning shot fired by
> ARRL's counsel, in the form of a letter saying essentially, "We'll be glad
> to work with you on an acceptable ordinance, but if you persist, we'll see
> you in court."
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TowerTalk mailing list
> TowerTalk at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
>